Go register to vote, you sexy thing, you
by Lisa Stone

When I first read about "Remember Your First Time?" -- a new ad campaign aimed at getting more single American women to vote -- I rolled my eyes.

"Oh, ha-ha," I thought about the double-entendre, "Is the way to my head really through my ...?" I couldn't imagine how ads that invoke the memory of virgin sex (and all the baggage that may come with it - yeah, that first time) could help change the fact that 20 million single American women didn't show up at the polls in Election 2004. Boy was I wrong.

The Women's Voices, Women Vote campaigns are fantastic. The videos are slick, well-produced and smart. The sexy headliner features well-known actors, from the venerable Tyne Daly to hotter-than-snot Rosario Dawson "mmmming" their way through reminiscences of their "first time" - in the ballot box, that is. I didn't feel patronized by their tone or remotely like some creepy guy dreamed this up and was seriously loving watching Regina King through the camera. In fact, I cringed very little, although Angie Harmon does lay it on a bit thick.

But while the sexy little number will doubtless get these public service announcements on the air (half the battle, natch) and women talking, this video is not my favorite. The short called "Dreams" gets my vote -- and damned if the last line didn't get me blinking hard at my computer. Go on - play the link above if you haven't already. That's right, I nearly cried when they eyed the camera said, "We don't have to dream about the future: We can wake up and vote for it." I'm losing it, I thought - then Romi LaSally at The Huffington Post emailed me Cooper Munroe's post and I saw that I wasn't the only one. The same line cracked her like an egg, too.

Why? Because I don't know a single American woman -- or a single single American woman in charge of her own household -- who isn't dreaming of a better future, and deeply concerned the state of the direction of our country today, be they self-identified Republicans, Democrats. Progressives, Conservatives, Libertarians, or Green.

Why, then, if we're running our own lives, paying for our own healthcare and taxes and seriously worrying about our retirements, did 20 million single women stay away from the polls in 2004? The answers provided by the WVWV research team resonate. Lead by the formidable Anna Greenberg of Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, the team conducted targeted focus groups on women (including oversampling for Hispanics) in two states and learned that:

"Despite immense dissatisfaction with direction of the country, unmarried women still under-participate in elections, particularly in off-year issues. Many women on their own see politics as irrelevant to their lives as political leaders simply do not address their issues, while others lack the time to learn about the issues and candidates; both contribute to depressed turnout among unmarried women. ...[U]nmarried women are so cynical about politics and political candidates, in particularly, they are loathe to believe or rely on any political ad they see in passing on television. They tend to dismiss this information as biased or confusing. These feelings are only confirmed when they see that politicians do not follow through with their promises or leave them out of the conversation. When the women we spoke to do actively seek out information, many of them rely on the Internet – particularly if they are younger or have a job where they are online. The notion is that they can collect information from many sources, weigh the competing views and come to their own decision about a particular issue or political choice. While it is not clear if this research process actually occurs, it is important to note that the primary issue is that these women do not believe they can trust the media – the primary source of political information in our current political environment – to tell the truth about much of anything." (I deleted liberally; read the entire PDF here.)

Ah. Disenfranchised by spin, working hard for our money, utterly ignored by candidates and lacking a balanced source of information, our single women voters tune out and go back to taking care of our immediate circle. That I can believe.

But that complaint is, I hope, will become increasingly outdated. Today the Web offers terrific, non-partisan sources of voter information that allow users to do an end-run around newscycles that spend their time calling Beltway horseraces and pitting op-ed versus op-ed. Here's where I turn for the best non-partisan facts about politics online:

I'll keep saying it: It's an underreported fact that American women are the voting majority and have been since 1964. But until single women commit the ultimate act of patriotism -- voting -- and add their voices to running our country, we will never change our world. I like how Lisa Witter of Feministing puts it:

"With recent elections that hinged on a little more than half a million votes nationally and a few hundred votes in Florida, single women have more power than they realize – or exercise.

...America is changing and too many voices are not being heard in our democracy. It’s time for single women in America to use their voice – and their vote – to make a difference in their lives." Then Witter signs off, "Sleeping giants no more..."

So get out there and vote, you sexy thing, you.

And while you're at it, I'd love to know:

- Did anyone here not vote in 2004 who plans to vote this time?

- Who among us is staying away from the polls?

- Do you find the Women's Voices Women Vote campaigns compelling? (Full list here)

- WVWV takes responsibility for turning out more single women voters in 2004. Do you plan to help or take any of their site's advice to help get the word out? More here: http://wvwv.org/

- What additional non-partisan are missing from the list above? Bring 'em on!

Submitted by Lisa Stone (view blog) on Mon, 10/16/2006 - 12:12

Comments

 

Rock On!

Great points....every single one. I am now appropriately energized to step back on my own soap box. The voting on "retention" of appointed judges in Missouri is at the top of my list.

Marianne Richmond
resonancepartnership

Submitted by Marianne Richmond on Mon, 10/16/2006 - 12:11
 

Missouri's Election: Retaining appointed
judges

Hi Marianne - Now *that* is an interesting subject. I searched the League of Women Voters site and Missouri was missing, so I pressed on to the National Women's Law Center list of Missouri ballot measures. I found a proposed constitutional amendment on what should happen to judges pensions if they're convicted of a felony -- is this what you mean? I am sorry - must claim ignorance. Here's the wording:

#7
Constitutional Amendment 7
Shall Article XIII, Section 3 of the Constitution be amended to require that legislators, statewide elected officials, and judges forfeit state pensions upon felony conviction, removal from office following impeachment or for misconduct, and to require that compensation for such persons be set by a citizens' commission subject to voter referendum.

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder
Surfette

Submitted by Lisa Stone on Mon, 10/16/2006 - 22:25
 

Retaining Judges (sorry for the delay)

I think the editorial below from the St. Louis Post Dispatch explains it. And Judge Judy? Well, the numbers do speak for themselves, especially if you are one of the number of people whose cases she didn't listen to or review but ruled anway, or whose hearings she forgot to put on her calender but whose lawyers wanted to be paid for preparing for, or whose cases are still awaiting scheduling or rulings months past the point of reasonableness or have a one sentence judgment that give new meaning to the grounds for abuse of discretion.

Yep, I had the personal pleasure of experiencing Judge Judy's Court room where she even ignored a mandate from the court of appeals to make a simple correction to a calculation.

Unfortunately, every person who pulls the "yes" lever without knowing who they are pulling it for and every person who doesn't vote perpetuate these numbers and the nightmare that is the family court system.

"Flunking Judge Judy

10/12/2006

For voters in Missouri's largest urban areas, the most opaque part of state election ballots are the judicial retention questions: "Should Judge So-and-so be retained in office?" Most voters have no idea who the judges are, much less if their records and qualifications argue for them retaining their positions.

Since 1940, Missouri has used a non-partisan merit system to select trial judges in its two big urban areas, as well as judges of the Supreme Court and the Missouri Court of Appeals. Special judicial commissions screen applicants and send three names to the governor, who makes the final selection. At the end of each judge's first year, and again at the end of each four-year judicial term, the judges must receive a majority of votes in retention elections to keep their jobs.

The non-partisan system isn't without its flaws, but a quick glance at Madison

County demonstrates what can happen when special interest money starts influencing partisan judicial elections. The key to the non-partisan system is giving voters a way to judge the judges, and that's where the Missouri Bar and local bar associations in St. Louis and Kansas City provide a critical service.

Lawyers who practice in trial courts are asked to rate each judge in 16 areas, including how they treat trial participants; the application and explanation of law and rules and maintaining control over the proceedings. The lawyers also vote on whether -- on the basis of the judge's performance, not his or her politics -- each judge should be retained. The complete survey is available online at www.showmecourts.org. (Under "Judicial Evaluation of Non-Partisan Judges," click on "Voters' Information About Judges.")

Most of the St. Louis and St. Louis County judges got between 75 and 90 percent approval ratings. But there are two notable exceptions. In St. Louis County, the 318 lawyers who rated Associate Circuit Court Judge Brenda Stith Loftin split almost evenly on the question of whether she should be retained, with 158 saying yes and 160 saying no. For Associate County Circuit Judge Judy Preddy Draper, it wasn't even close. Only 27.5 percent of the 302 lawyers who filled out the survey thought she should be retained. Lynn Ann Vogel, president of the Bar Association of Metropolitan St. Louis, refused to elaborate on the specific problems lawyers have with Judge Draper. "The numbers speak for themselves," she said.

They do. She was rated particularly poorly in: use of good judgment in the application of relevant law and rules; basing decisions on evidence and arguments; giving reasons for rulings and consistently applying laws, rules and sentences. Judge Draper's score may be an all-time low.

County voters should vote No on Judge Draper's retention."

Thanks,
Marianne

Submitted by Marianne Richmond on Tue, 10/17/2006 - 01:27
 

Thanks Marianne

Definitely seems like an issue that should not fall to the voters, but I also worry about the possibility of this system becoming a popularity contest within a regulated, licensed industry where other options should exist. What if a judge interprets the law in a way that is politically unpopular in Missouri -- are they going to be judged fairly? With issues such as habeas corpus and abortion so contested, I worry about that...

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder
Surfette

Submitted by Lisa Stone on Tue, 10/17/2006 - 11:35
 

It works

Thanks to Marianne for info on a topic I would have been one of the uninformed lever pullers. I don't know that I will have the opportunity to vote on Judge Draper but I know how I will if permitted.

As to the system here, a good friend of mine who is currently clerking for a federal judge in Jeff City explained the system to me and it seems to work well enough that a number of other states have adopted something similar. I wouldn't think that would happen if it didn't have safeguards or work fairly well.

Jim Heivilin

Submitted by heivilinj on Tue, 10/17/2006 - 13:38
 

You are right...

It COULD work....depends on if information to make an informed decision is available and accessed.

Marianne Richmond
resonancepartnership

Submitted by Marianne Richmond on Tue, 10/17/2006 - 16:21
 

Judging their popularity

Its such a multifaceted issue really....on one hand you have judges who are running for re-election on TV campaigning on issues. This seems wrong. Or you hear pundits speak of the desire of the Republicans to retain control of the Senate because controlling judicial appointments is an intregal part of the Republican "agenda." This also seems wrong.

But let's face it, appointed or elected the judicial system is subject to your popularity contest question. The "retention" option could actually be a slight improvement IF people took the time to read the information provided and voted accordingly. Judge Judy's rating by trial lawyers...as I said, was quite accurate.

When I was told that she said she couldn't remember the case (it was a 2 day trial, you can guess the cost to me), and couldn't FIND the requested "findings of fact and law" from either attorney so therefore turned down ALL of the motions, I suggested it was similar to a surgeon going into the operating room and saying, I don't remember what the diagnosis was for the patient or if it is the left leg or the right leg we are supposed to amputate, so let's take them both off.

What's the difference? Well, a surgeon would be sued for malpractice but a judge has judicial immunity. But, in either case, the patients/clients are left to live with the consequences and try and correct the outcomes of incompetence.

So, back to the point of your original post... vote, baby vote!

Marianne

Marianne Richmond
resonancepartnership

Submitted by Marianne Richmond on Tue, 10/17/2006 - 16:18
 

Touche Marianne

!! Thank you for digging in and explaining to me, both of you. I look forward to hearing what happens...

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder
Surfette

Submitted by Lisa Stone on Tue, 10/17/2006 - 22:14
 

YES!

I too, rolled my eyes at first. And then I read and watched the ads.

And in the end...even IF (and that's a big IF) "sex sells" is being employed here to get out the vote. So be it. It IS that important.

I'm talking about my first time on Queen of Spain today, and I would love to see EVERYONE blog their first times at their own sites as well. Spread the word. Vote yer asses off.

Politics & News Contributing Editor
Queen of Spain

Submitted by Erin Kotecki Vest on Mon, 10/16/2006 - 13:09
 

"Poke, poke, poke..."

Erin, blast you, I've brain-damaged the dogs -- your lede is hilarious. The Queen of Spain begins:

Poke.
Poke.
Poke.

…and it was over...

A great post. Read it all here, folks: http://queenofspainblog.com/2006/10/15/my-first-time/

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder
Surfette

Submitted by Lisa Stone on Mon, 10/16/2006 - 22:28
 

An always voter

I was not aware of this campaign until I read your post, Lisa. I LOVE the PSA! And it got me thinking about my "first time" -- in 1976!

But, even as committed as I am to always voting (how could a Poli Sci major NOT vote), I admit (and I blogged) that I was actually considering not voting in our primary this fall because there just did not seem to be any inspired campaigning or inspired candidates. It felt like everyone was taking my vote for granted, just going through the motions and sticking the yard signs up as early as possible.

Clearly, I did vote because I believe it is important and crucial. But if someone who is a diehard political junkie can't get inspired and even toys with the idea of staying home from the polls, what hope is there for the rest of the electorate? For me, the best strategy for anyone who wants to get elected to any office, is "Inspire me."

But I'm not holding my breath.

Submitted by PunditMom on Mon, 10/16/2006 - 13:10
 

PunditMom, you have a soapbox here...

Gorgeous comment. My fave bit:

But if someone who is a diehard political junkie can't get inspired and even toys with the idea of staying home from the polls, what hope is there for the rest of the electorate? For me, the best strategy for anyone who wants to get elected to any office, is "Inspire me."

But I'm not holding my breath.

Given your media and poli sci background, I'm dying to ask...if you could rub a red-white-and-blue lamp, what WOULD inspire you? Sky's the limit, woman -- what's your #1 wish (and feel free to go on to #2 and #3...) for the ballot in 2006? Or beyond?
Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder
Surfette

Submitted by Lisa Stone on Mon, 10/16/2006 - 22:32
 

Sorry I missed the soapbox!

Boy, I should have checked back sooner! That's a tough question. But I just feel like so many politicians talk at us instead of to us. So few of them really try to connect with the voters in a way that I think used to happen -- they say what they think we want to hear or allowe themselves just to be "packaged" instead of telling us what they genuinely believe or think would be new and inspiring messages. In the post-Reagan era, everyone is about the soundbite and not the substance.

How to inspire the disappointed junkie?

1. Talk about change that would really make a difference and be committed to that change, whether tou get elected or not. And then keep working for that change in the post-election season (tho' I'm afraid there is no such season anymore).

I think the greatest example of that right now is Al Gore and his movie, An Inconvenient Truth. He's not president, but he's still out there trying to convince us all of the gigantic environmental crisis we're facing. (If, as he says in the movie, it is our "moral imperative" to save our environment, he should run in 2008).

2. Related topic -- don't be afraid to lose. Politicians, say what you REALLY mean and think regardless of how you think the voters will respond -- just be authentic.

I'll keep thinking! Thanks for the soapbox, Lisa!

Submitted by PunditMom on Tue, 11/14/2006 - 13:30
 

Who was it who said "if you

Who was it who said "if you don't have someone you want to vote for, surely there is someone you need to vote against"?

I know I wasn't terribly inspired by Senator Kerry but I definately voted against Mister Bush.

Jim Heivilin

Submitted by heivilinj on Tue, 10/17/2006 - 13:41
 

Sharing my first time

I am with Erin, and so pleased to share my first time. I always vote, and I can't entirely understand why someone would not. On the other hand, I hail from Chicago, where we all learn to vote early, and vote often.

Suzanne, BlogHer Contributing Editor - Feminsim & Gender
Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS)& Other Rants

Submitted by Suzanne Reisman on Mon, 10/16/2006 - 13:51
 

Nice copywriting: "Press the right
buttons..."

You do have a way with words Suzanne:

Voting is like foreplay. Change won’t come if people don’t try and press the right buttons.

But what saddens me is your earlier sentence that "Even if you think your vote doesn’t count (and sadly, you are kind of correct), it is important to get out there on election day."

Do you think your vote doesn't count? WHY -- and what would change that opinion? I ask that in all sincerity...sounds from your post that you think this game is fixed?

Check out Suzanne's post here: http://www.cussandotherrants.com/2006/10/my-frist-time.html

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder
Surfette

Submitted by Lisa Stone on Mon, 10/16/2006 - 22:35
 

On way to look at voting

Your vote may not seem to count in the large scale of things, but consider this: your vote can completely negate the vote of someone who totally and completely disagrees with every political view you have. That could be a rather empowering way of seeing it.

I saw All the King's Men recently (great performances, but story? -- anyway) and there's this one great moment where Huey Long (or the fictional version) is talking to folks at a carnival, and he says, "If you don't vote, you don't matter," and he's not talking about the innocent "stand up and be counted" kind of idea, but that if you don't vote, then the people making decisions on the basis of staying in office aren't going to pay any attention to you.

Anyway, a vote can be more than a drop in a bucket. One of the saddest and even frightening things in this country is that so many people just don't vote. Sure, there some would say it's just as well, but when such a small percentage of voters can win an election, well, I just wish more people voted. We'd all be better off, I think.

Laura Scott
design, snap, blog ... admin

Submitted by Laura Scott on Tue, 10/17/2006 - 08:19
 

It's a great idea

Of course, there are those who will say that encouraging women to vote, just vote, is in itself a political campaign. I find myself wishing they had started this a month ago. Voter registration deadlines have largely passed, and so many non-voters aren't registered at all.

I had to change my registration, and that took a bit of sleuthing, since I wanted to avoid the corporate-backed voter drive sites. (Working Assets may be "green," but over the years since I quit their long-distance service, I must have received two or three pounds of paper junk mail, trying to get me to rejoin, so maybe I'm unusual there.) It's like a state secret, how or where to register. Your average post office doesn't have the forms out. My Googling took me to the third page of results before I found a government site. (Now those things can change day to day, but still.) And that government site said they are no longer handling voter registration, and sent me to another site, where they were all about elections but hid their voter registration in a non-obvious link.

Then, to make the deadline, I ended up printing out the form and taking it by hand to the Boulder County Clerk, who then took the time to verify my registration and even wrote down in longhand my polling place, just in case the notification didn't arrive in the mail in time. (That was way cool.)

Overall, voter registration took more time than your average "what's the point of voting?" slacker would invest. But how many are seeing these commercials and thinking, "Oh, maybe I should register to vote this year"?

Laura Scott
design, snap, blog ... admin

Submitted by Laura Scott on Mon, 10/16/2006 - 16:29
 

Best voter registration site?

Amen, Laura, you are quite right that many states make it much harder than it should be to vote.

I just checked out MTV's Rock the Vote and it's actually the fastest voter registration database that I've found. Here's what to do:

1. Turn down the volume on your computer. DOWN. Trust me.

2. Go here: https://secure5.ctsg.com/rtv/ovr/indexNoPop.asp?ms=RTV_Nav

3. Ignore the animation in the screen and look at the bottom -- see where you can enter your state? Do so.

Laura, you're right that the opportunity to register is a narrowing target, but if voters ACT NOW and shamelessly peer-pressure encourage their friends to vote, there's still a window of opportunity.

The other side of the coin? Some folks procrastinate and don't register until the last minute, like taxes. I urge everyone to email their friends and help make it happen. YOUR influence could make a difference!

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder
Surfette

Submitted by Lisa Stone on Mon, 10/16/2006 - 22:52
 

Voter registration deadlines vary by state

For Colorado, the deadline was a week ago. You know, with all the technology being thrown at counting votes, with such haste that there are serious questions about the security and veracity of such machines, its too bad such energy and resources weren't put into providing the means for same-day registration.

Laura Scott
design, snap, blog ... admin

Submitted by Laura Scott on Tue, 10/17/2006 - 08:25
 

Two years ago when I bought

Two years ago when I bought my house I had to alter my registration and I found the Boone County (Missouri) site in one try and finished it up in under 20 minutes. I also found my new polling place.

Jim Heivilin

Submitted by heivilinj on Tue, 10/17/2006 - 13:53
 

Dana From The Dana

Dana From The Dana Files

This is a great campaign. I'm taking the Queen's Challenge tomorrow!

Submitted by Dana J. Tuszke on Mon, 10/16/2006 - 19:42
 

UPDATED: Dana, come back...

...and post a link to your "memory" when it's live? I'd love to read it!

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder
Surfette

Submitted by Lisa Stone on Mon, 10/16/2006 - 22:53
 

I believe in the importance of voting

I missed the primaries this spring because I was just way too disorganzied and had way too much personal stuff going on to be able to focus, but that was the only election (including primaries and the Calif. special election) that I've missed this decade. That said, I often feel that I'm voting more on pricipal (the right to vote is hard earned and I won't give it up!) than any particularly zealous support of a candidate or proposition.

Often with all the attack ads it seems like all the candidates stink so I go with the one who smells the least. As for the propostions, well.... it's so hard to make a decision. I like this part of the prop, but not that part. I think this part is great, but that part is horrible. Do I vote yes or do I vote no? Does the good out weigh the bad?

Voting is a lot of work. A lot of thought goes into decisions that won't immediately, or sometimes ever, impact me. There are hard choices to make, so I can understand why some women wouldn't do it. Too much effort, not enough pay off. But for me, I'll always make a strong effort to vote. Too many people fought too hard for me to have that right and I'm not going to waste it. I'm glad to see that there's an out reach effort to get more women to vote. And that last line really got to me, too.

Submitted by Absurda on Mon, 10/16/2006 - 22:22
 

Absurda, I dedicate this link to you...

To your point -- "Too many people fought too hard for me to have that right and I'm not going to waste it." -- I found this post on YouTube. It was directed by aimenhoodle. Reminded me of your comment:


Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder
Surfette

Submitted by Lisa Stone on Mon, 10/16/2006 - 22:58
 

Does anyone remember Oprah at election time?

She had a STUNNING show on getting out the vote. It was around the time that P. Diddy was telling us to "Vote or Die." At NO point during the show did she discuss Democratic or Republican politics. Her point - and the celebs she had on with her - was that we had worked very very hard for the vote and that to not use it was to squander the work of the women and minorities who'd fought to get the right to vote.

Hallelujah.

I was a big fan of the Votergasm campaign. It's raunchy, it's hilarious, it certainly went the extra mile to encourage young, hot voters. Plus, voting is hot.

Given the history of the vote, apathy is a great tragedy. I tend to think that we should be active, responsible humans, but given that we're not, I wouldn't mind seeing us require our citizens to participate in choosing our elected officials. Clearly, what we're doing now doesn't work.

It shouldn't just be our job to get ourselves to the polls - we should be inspiring others to do the same. Take your kids to the polls. Go with your neighbors and then have a party. Tell everyone you know that it's time to get busy with Democracy. Vote. Vote. Vote.

A-hem. Calming down now. Whew.

Nerd's Eye View

Submitted by Pam on Mon, 10/16/2006 - 23:28
 

Oprah's site - another great way to register
to vote

Pam, great point! I did some searching and found Oprah's voter registration site here: http://www.oprah.com/presents/2004/vote/pres_2004_vote_main.jhtml

Even better, she has the best, easiest-to-absorb list of registration deadlines I've seen anywhere here: http://www.oprah.com/presents/2004/vote/state/pres_2004_vote_state_deadl...

And to Laura's point, time has indeed slipped away for most voters, but voters can still register in the following states:

State Registration deadline
Vermont * 10/25/2004
New Hampshire * 10/23/2004
Alabama 10/22/2004
Iowa * 10/21/2004
Wisconsin * 10/20/2004
Connecticut 10/19/2004
Maine * 10/19/2004
California 10/18/2004
Kansas 10/18/2004
South Dakota 10/18/2004

* An asterick signifies that there are other possibilities for registering.

Thanks Oprah... Now I see what The Prospect's Mary Lynn F. Jones was on about when she tried to draft Oprah for U.S. Senate in 2003...

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder
Surfette

Submitted by Lisa Stone on Tue, 10/17/2006 - 10:09
 

Darn, all these memories!!

I must admit, I don't remember my first vote. My memory had it that it was a presidential vote, but doing a little research that could not have been possible. I fell into the group of newly "franchised" voters when the 26th Amendment was ratified in 1971.

So my first time? Either November of 71 or May or 72. I know the amendment was ratified in July, but when did it go into effect?

Whatever. My parents took my brothers and me to the polling place, turning the act into a formal ceremony like getting our first banking account (at age 10).

I have only missed one chance to vote since then; an off-year vote when pneumonia kept me home. I vote when there isn't much there to vote on. I vote when I don't like the people presented for me to vote on (the issues? I always care about). I think globally and vote locally.

I always proudly wear my little "I voted" sticker.

Now I am registered as a permanent absentee voter, so I don't even need to stop at the center to get the job done.

I do miss my stickers, though.

Debra
A Stitch In Time
Deb's Daily Distractions

Submitted by debra roby on Mon, 10/16/2006 - 23:33
 

Debra, you deserve a tattoo

...for all that devoted voting. That's a commitment to the Constitution right there.

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder
Surfette

Submitted by Lisa Stone on Tue, 10/17/2006 - 11:39
 

Lisa, is it a generational thing??

Every woman I know around my age votes. And tells everyone that they voted. I wonder if it's because of coming of age during Vietnam.. and being part of the 26 Amendment generation.

I read that women don't vote; I read that younger women don't vote. I cannot understand the choice at all. It's the responsibility of being a citizen.

A few years ago I started planning a fiberart piece that would have been based upon women voting. Maybe I need to resurrect it? Photos of women from 18 to 98 who voted this fall and photos of the suffragettes who made this possible.

Debra
A Stitch In Time
Deb's Daily Distractions

Submitted by debra roby on Tue, 10/17/2006 - 17:56
 

Debra, the short-answer is yes

...but I need to do some research tomorrow to share the stats. Good assignment, thank you! ;)

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder
Surfette

Submitted by Lisa Stone on Tue, 10/17/2006 - 22:19
 

Wow!

Wow, Lisa, that's an awesome video! I got a little choked up by that, thanks for sharing! I'll definitly have to pass this around to my buddies.

Submitted by Absurda on Tue, 10/17/2006 - 09:31
 

She's great, isn't she?

Glad you liked it Absurda. Many props to the director.

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder
Surfette

Submitted by Lisa Stone on Tue, 10/17/2006 - 11:40
 

Now that we've addressed voting...

Lisa (or another CE),

Does anyone have a take on the AARP campaign: Don't Vote.

http://www.dontvote.com/map.html

Debra
A Stitch In Time
Deb's Daily Distractions

Submitted by debra roby on Tue, 10/17/2006 - 16:04
 

AARP very organized

I am impressed with how organized their info is and how you can research who votes which way on certain topics. But their table of contents on issues are limited
* AARP Policy on Social Security
* AARP Policy on Retirement Security (IRAs)
* AARP Policy on Medicare
* AARP Policy on Long-Term Care
* AARP Policy on Health Care Reform

I understand that these are supposed to be the most important issues to the AARP voting block, but what about the war in Iraq, Afghanistan or even the fed. budget?

Birdsword

Submitted by Roberta on Tue, 10/17/2006 - 19:32
 

Excelente. Felicidades!!!

Es importante hacer conciencia de los deberes ciudadanos entre las mujeres.

Julia Ardón
Costa Rica
http://juliaardon.blogspot.com/
http://www.elsalondebelleza.com/

Submitted by juliaardon on Wed, 10/25/2006 - 21:36
 

Yes! Great marketing

I could not agree more. This follows all the rules of effective marketing - asking for a clear call to action and providing an immediate reward for that action (in this case, good feelings and memories). It shows voting carries attractive emotional benefits. Thanks for highlighting; I linked to it on my blog.

Submitted by Katya Andresen on Thu, 10/26/2006 - 08:11